tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286844703685834774.post2620156687634703022..comments2018-01-12T15:14:48.933-06:00Comments on Carless in OKC: What Does Carlessness Really Look Like in OKC?John Tankardnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286844703685834774.post-6994365821633351962015-02-05T11:56:46.227-06:002015-02-05T11:56:46.227-06:00Valid point about the household size. I did associ...Valid point about the household size. I did associate it with American Community Survey data where the average household size was 2.5, but the number of households is a more appropriate measure, which holds up with the comparisons to other municipalities in the region. <br /><br />Thanks for the comment!John Tankardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05530291812483241878noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286844703685834774.post-27595208812332372192015-02-05T11:46:57.005-06:002015-02-05T11:46:57.005-06:00I strongly agree with you that we need improved tr...I strongly agree with you that we need improved transit systems and sidewalks. It&#39;s going to be a tough fight however, for a city that has a tough time maintaining its own roads and bridges.<br /><br />One thing I would nitpick is the &quot;~40,000 carless residents&quot; bit...I&#39;d imagine it wouldn&#39;t *quite* be as simple as a 2.5x multiplier, simply because if a household has two adults, they may be more likely to have a car to share. It probably is close to that number, but that might not stand up if this went to a newspaper editorial, or when addressing city council. James Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286844703685834774.post-52672071620263860992015-02-05T08:41:44.845-06:002015-02-05T08:41:44.845-06:00There&#39;s definitely no argument for &quot;more ...There&#39;s definitely no argument for &quot;more buses, and only more buses&quot; here. An all-of-the-above option is obviously best, but let&#39;s face it, alternative transportation is not a high priority here in OKC, so available funds need to be allocated where a real difference can be made for those who really need it. In a city where our current bus system stops running at 7:00pm and doesn&#39;t run on Sundays (save for the 2 brand-new night routes, 23 and 11, which run late on weekdays but also have a very limited service area), it doesn&#39;t make sense for a commuter rail (connecting Norman and Edmond to OKC) for people who *already have the means to get around* to be our next step in transit expansion. Especially when we also still have such big gaps in our cycling infrastructure and so many miles of sidewalk that need to be built or repaired. Elizabeth Tankardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11841076918338998940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-286844703685834774.post-12857706216513102242015-02-05T01:27:09.571-06:002015-02-05T01:27:09.571-06:00&gt; rather than spending it to try get drivers ou...&gt; rather than spending it to try get drivers out of their cars.<br /><br />I would argue that, if possible, an all of the above option would be a better approach. I&#39;ve heard people ask why they should pay more in taxes just so the homeless have more bus service. Not that I agree with them, but a commuter rail option would make transit more visible in the outlying areas, and may serve as a step toward better recognition of the deficiencies of downtown transit.<br /><br />Arguing for more buses, and only more buses, is self-defeating. If we want to improve transit for all, we need well-rounded systems. Buses that run on grids, with 15 minute headways or less, and dedicated lanes in congested areas. Trains to provide longer distance service, or at least service in areas where the ridership demands it. Better bicycle infrastructure to help connect the last mile of the transit grid. And, of course, building our streets on a more pedestrian level.John Hansonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02219409076052232933noreply@blogger.com